Ordinance 93-2853ORDINANCE NO. 93-2853
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 89-2665 BY: AMENDING SECTION 6,
"DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS", AMENDING SUBSECTION 6-2,
ENTITLED "RM -1, RESIDENTIAL MULTI—FAMILY, LOW INTENSITY"
BY ADDING A 50' HEIGHT RESTRICTION FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
OR ADDITIONS FOR THOSE AREAS IN THE RM -1 DISTRICT WHICH
DO NOT ALREADY HAVE A HEIGHT RESTRICTION; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, PROVIDING FOR A
REPEALER; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City's Planning, Design and Historic Preservation Division has recommended that
Subsection 6-1, entitled "RM -1, Residential Multi -Family, Low Intensity", of Section 6, entitled "Development
Regulations" of the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 89-2665 be amended by adding a fifty (50) foot
height restriction for new construction or additions for those areas in the RM -1 District which do not already
have a height restriction; and
WHEREAS, on March 30, 1993 the City's Planning Board held a public hearing and considered the
aforesaid proposed amendment and voted 5-1 in favor of said amendment; and
WHEREAS, this amendment is necessary to carry out the purpose of the RM -1 District as stated in
Subsection 6-2A.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, which purpose calls for low intensity, low rise single and multiple
family residences; and
WHEREAS, a height limitation of fifty (50) feet for new development would be in keeping with the as -
built character of the areas now zoned RM -1 and located outside of the Architectural District; and
WHEREAS, since the RM -1 District generally abuts single-family districts, it is appropriate that a height
limitation be imposed which would effectively preserve a reasonable low-rise transition zone between the single
family residential areas and the higher intensity high rise residential and commercial areas.
NOW, THEREFOR, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA:
Underlined words = new Language
&pike --out = deleted language
SECTION 1. That Subsection 6-2 of Zoning Ordinance No. 89-2665, entitled "RM -1 Residential Multi Family,
Low Intensity' is hereby amended as follows:
6-2 RM -1 RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY, LOW INTENSITY.
B. Development Regulations
1
Lot Arca equal to or Icss than
15,000 sq.ft.
Lot Arca between 15,001 and
30,000 sq.ft.
Lot Arca greater than 30,001
sq.ft
1. Base FAR
Architectural District - .75
otherwise - 1.0
Architectural District -1.1
otherwise - 1.25
Architectural District -1.1
otherwise - 1.6
2. Maximum FAR with bonus
(See Sec. 6-24).
1.2..5
1.6
Architectural District -1.6
otherwise - 2.0
1
3. Min. Lot Arca
(sq. ft.)
4. Min. Lot Width
(feet)
5. Min. Unit Size
(sq.ft.)
G Avg. Unit Size
(sq. ft-)
7. Max. Bldg. Height
(feet)
5,600
50
New Construction -
550
Rehabilitated
Buildings - 400
Ncw Construction - 800
Rehabilitated
Buildings - 550
Architectural
District - 40
otherwise -neve 50
SECTION 2. INCLUSION IN ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 89-2665. It is the intention of the City
Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of
the City of Miami Beach Zoning Ordinance No. 89-2665 as amended; that the sections of this ordinance may
be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention; and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to
"section" or other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER. That all Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same
are herewith repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held
invalid, the remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect on the 26th day of
June , 1993.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 16th day of
ATTEST:
%Th*A".•
CITY CLERK
1st reading 6/2/93
2nd reading 6/16/93
DJG/JGG
a:2\ORDHGT.93
June
FOAM APPROVED
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
BY:��
DATF: z -
2
s3
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH FLORIDA 33139
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER TELEPHONE: (305) 673-7010
FAX: (305) 673-7782
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. ,30--C1
TO:
3
TO: Mayor Seymour Gelber and
Members of the City Commission
FROM: Roger M. Carat
City Manager
SUBJECT:
DATE: JUNE 16, 1993
AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE 89-2665 RELATIVE TO IMPOSING
A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT RESTRICTION OF 50' IN THE AREAS
ZONED RM -1, RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY LOW INTENSITY DISTRICT,
OUTSIDE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DISTRICT - SECOND READING
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt, upon second reading, the
proposed amendment to Zoning Ordinance 89-2665, which would impose a height limit of 50'
on all parcels in the City that are zoned RM -1, Residential Multi -Family Low Intensity District,
outside of the Architectural District, which already has a height limitation.
BACKGROUND
The Request
The City P.dministration is presently requesting consideration of an amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance which would place a height restriction of 50' on all properties located in the RM -1
District, outside the Architectural District. There is already a height limit of 40' within the
Architectural District for RM -1 properties.
History
On April 21, 1992 the Planning Board recommended approval of an amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance restricting the height of developments in the RM -1 District that are adjacent to a
waterway and within 200 feet of a single family district. The purpose of that proposed
amendment was to ensure that those multi -family sites on canals, across from single family
homes, would be limited to a maximum height.
The Planning Board, at that time and at subsequent workshop meetings, expressed a desire to
possibly expand this restriction to all sites in the RM Districts (RM -1, RM -2 and RM -3) that are
adjacent to a single family district, regardless of location on a waterway. Conceptually, it was
argued, the same rationale should apply to all such situations since it is the juxtaposition of
height between multi -family and single family districts which is the real issue.
The Planning Board, at its special meeting of October 20, 1992, held a hearing on a proposed
amendment to limit the height of structures in the RM -1, RM -2 and RM -3 Districts which are
within 300 feet of single family owned properties. The Board voted to defer any action on the
amendment, pending further study by Staff.
On November 24, 1992, the Administration withdrew its application on this amendment to the
Zoning Ordinance. The Administration felt that due to the on-going analysis of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the matter required furthcr study and that there
may be suitable alternatives to achieve proper development patterns in these areas.
1
AGENDA
ITEM
DATE
R -S -F
(7.--N0-93
The City Commission, at its meeting of December 9, 1992, requested that the Planning Board
and staff study and make a recommendation on limiting the height of buildings in the RM -1
District, citywide. This was done simultaneously with a request to examine the possibility of
creating a new low-rise multi -family garden apartment district as an alternative approach.
The Planning Board, at its meeting of March 30, 1993, voted 5-1 in favor of recommending
approval of the proposed amendment to impose a height limit of 50' in the RM -I District
citywide, with the exception of the Architectural District which already has a height limitation
of 40'. With regard to the proposed Garden Apartment District (RG), the Board at the same
meeting voted to defer its recommendation on this matter until July, after the City Commission
has made a decision to either approve or turn down the RM -1 amendment.
The City Commission, at its meeting of June 2, 1993, approved on first reading by a vote of 7-0,
the proposed amendment to impose a 50' height limit.
ANALYSIS
There are several areas of the City which are zoned RM -1. The largest of these areas, in the
Architectural District from 6th to 16th Street between Lenox and Pennsylvania Avenues, has
an existing height restriction of 40 feet. All other areas in the City which arc zoned RM -I have
an unlimited height restriction.
The RM -1 District is the City's lowest intensity multi -family district. Although it has a
relatively low Floor Area Ratio with a Maximum of 2.0, this lack of a height restriction means
that a developer could choose to construct a very slender tall tower on an RM -1 site. Ironically,
the present District Purpose in the Zoning Ordinance (Section 6-2A.1) states that "This district
is designed for low intensity, low-rise, single and multiple family residences".
By imposing a height limitation in the RM -1 District throughout the City (in addition to the
Architectural District), the following would be accomplished:
a) New development would be in keeping with the as -built character of areas now
zoned RM -1 outside of the Architectural District. Of the 450 buildings in the
RM -I District outside the Architectural District, only 21 buildings (4.7%) arc 5
stories in height or higher.
b) The RM -I District, as a low -intensity zone, generally abuts single family zoned
areas. If the RM -1 District is to function properly as a buffer or transition zone
between single family areas and high intensity residential and commercial areas,
the imposition of a height limitation is appropriate.
Of the twenty-one (21) existing buildings that are five (5) stories or higher in the RM -1
District, sixteen (16) are already non -conforming in terms of Floor Area Ration (FAR). All
twenty-one (21) buildings are also non -conforming with regard to at least one of the provisions
of the Ordinance. Therefore, the creation of a height limit will Bot cause any conforming
building to become non -conforming.
CONCLUSION
The Planning Board, as previously stated, voted 5-1 to recommend approval of this proposed
amendment to Zoning Ordinance 89-2665. By imposing a height limitation in the RM -1
District, the Administration has concluded that the City of Miami Beach would finally have
a low-rise multi -family zoning classification that is in keeping with the district's purpose.
Accordingly, we concur with the recommendation of the Planning Board.
Based on the foregoing, the Administration believes that the City Commission should proceed
to adopt this amending ordinance, upon second reading.
DJG:JGG:gf
attachment
a:2\PB\maxbldg3.93
2
29
u•1
Co
I
M
O
aZ
z w
H U
xz
O t4
0
v a)
U
a a
ro o
•)-1 v
• a)
O A
b0
1/40
0
N b0
a) •H
> 'O
•rl C:
(f) CU
a) ql
a)
� T
a ,n
o Ln m
�O O
00 N •H
• I +-)
•- cb
'xi CO
G �
a) b0
-114,
• o w
7, �'